|
Post by queenzod on Jan 28, 2020 22:15:21 GMT
I think the days of two male leads *not* being accused of exchanging smoldering glances are long behind us.
|
|
|
Post by mllemass on Jan 28, 2020 23:33:16 GMT
As long as it gets people into theatres to see it, they can ship these two men all they want.
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Jan 29, 2020 0:09:44 GMT
I thought my president was joking when he said he will organize a raffle to get rid of the ex-president's plane and today he presented the tickets design. Obviously I am a very confused person who sees humor where there is none!
|
|
|
Post by mllemass on Jan 29, 2020 0:46:58 GMT
Despite the headline, the Aproxx reviewer didn’t even like the movie. What a weird review!
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Jan 29, 2020 0:55:00 GMT
He admits he enjoyed it! He just can't admit he really like it because it's a conventional film!
But yes, it's a silly review!
|
|
|
Reviews
Jan 29, 2020 5:11:34 GMT
via mobile
Post by roverpup on Jan 29, 2020 5:11:34 GMT
As long as it gets people into theatres to see it, they can ship these two men all they want. Yeah, but if someone promises viewers that they are going to be seeing a sexy homoerotic story, and then once they actually see it and realise it is really about FRIENDSHIP... well then there will be all sorts of accusations of "queerbaiting" and such! It's happened before, you know.😘
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Jan 29, 2020 11:50:31 GMT
|
|
|
Post by prudence on Jan 30, 2020 3:28:02 GMT
Up to 77% on rotten tomatoes. Range has been 70 to 78% so far.
|
|
|
Reviews
Jan 30, 2020 13:50:22 GMT
via mobile
Post by roverpup on Jan 30, 2020 13:50:22 GMT
Honesty I'm pretty well through with RT nowadays. Especially after reading this - deadline.com/2019/08/rotten-tomatoes-reports-adding-600-critics-to-tomatometer-in-diversity-push-1202706072/ They have flooded their "reviewers" pool with so many unknowledgeable, agenda driven and "fly-by-night" unreliable "critics" that their review numbers lack any kind of cachet at all to me. Just look at this quote from the article - "In a survey of the 600 newbies about their experiences, a strong majority indicated that gaining approved status on Rotten Tomatoes helped their traffic numbers, social media metrics and industry access. But many identified a number of barriers that still exist, with 61% citing travel costs to festivals and 59% noting they still face a fight to prove their legitimacy as journalists." In other words, they AREN'T legitimate journalists! And how telling that top among the indicators of just how being included on RT has "helped" is increased traffic numbers... sounds like they're just in it for attention for themselves that that platform can garner! Wow! This comment sums it up nicely - "Rotten Tomatoes should be removing critics, not adding more. Most of them as it stands now are completely unknown and are writing for websites no one has heard of or visited. Quantity over quality is a terrible idea and only reinforces the idea that film criticism is dead." Add this to the penchant the RT format has for allowing trolls to overtake the audience scores and it all boils down to a completely worthless site. And apparently the traffic on the site is also reflecting this as well, as the numbers have plummeted recently.
|
|
|
Post by onebluestocking on Jan 30, 2020 17:20:37 GMT
I prefer Metacritic. Most of their reviewers are from publications I've heard of. Or, visit Rottentomatoes but just read the 'Top Critics' reviews.
|
|